IRVINE, Diane C. Bass: The thought that probably went through everyone’s mind when the media initially announced a suspect was in custody for the Boston Marathon bombing was, “They got the guy!” But did they?

A woman looks at a street memorial near the scene of twin bombings at the Boston Marathon on April 17, 2013 in Boston, Massachusetts. The explosions, which occurred near the finish line of the 116-year-old Boston race on April 15, resulted in the deaths of three people with more than 170 others injured. Security has been heightened across the nation as the search continues for the person or people behind the bombings. (Spencer Platt, Getty Images)

Since then a manhunt and confrontation has occurred between authorities and two other suspects, demonstrating the difficulty of initial identifications of suspects.

Every person charged with a crime is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.

In order for someone to be convicted of a crime in the U.S., the government must prove that he or she is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the foundation upon which our justice system rests and one of the things that separates us from other nations – the very essence of our freedom.

Evidence may rise to a level of probable cause, which is enough for the FBI to taken someone into custody. I am sure that the FBI has more information that they are not sharing with the public, and I have the utmost of respect for FBI and the work they do. But that is not the point here. Their work is only the first step in the process. They are not the judge and jury.

We need evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to prove who set off the bombs. In fact, if you watch the Boston Marathon bombing video, you will see at least five people walking with knapsacks or other bags in the same direction and manner as the suspects. Are they all suspects? I don’t think so. Just because someone walks away from a crime scene does not prove that they are responsible. They may be. But again, it has not been proven yet.

What I’m getting at is the knee-jerk reaction we all have, myself included, when the media reports on a story like this. We immediately jump to the conclusion that this is the guy and it’s over.

We have such high regard for law enforcement that we can’t imagine they would get it wrong. But it happens all the time. Law enforcement is not infallible. They are only doing the best they can with the information they have. They are human.

So let’s all take a step back and not convict suspects before they have their day in court. We don’t have all the information. We have a wounded nation that wants justice. Let’s give the justice system a chance to play itself out.

_____________

HUNTINGTON BEACH, Barry Wasserman:The Boston bombing suspects, one of whom has been killed, appear to be believers in Islam. It also appears they have lived in this country for about 10 years. The World Trade Center Twin Towers killers were also Muslim and came mostly from Saudi Arabia.

These are radical Muslims and are not to be confused with Muslims who savor peace and want to raise their families with good values in a wholesome environment, the same as the rest of us. How do you separate good people from those intent on killing? You have many Iranians who are Muslim but are not Arabs, and you have many Arabs who not Muslim.

Yet, many of these people have one thing in common, which is the total destruction of Israel or, as they use the term, “Zionist” nation. What kind of belief is that wherein they incur the name of Allah to sanctify and justify genocide?

Perhaps being an atheist or agnostic is more realistic than what is sought in the various religions that over time have invoked the name of God to justify killing millions of people.

_____________

LAGUNA BEACH, Paul Spencer: So the two suspected Boston Marathon bombers are from Chechnya and came to this country when they were just boys back in 2003. Where does this hate for America come from at such an early age?

Some people love to come to America for their education, but there must have been some hate in the boy’s family for these two to turn out this way. This country needs to stop being a soft touch for people who want to do us harm.

The limits of torture

NEWPORT BEACH, Ron Williams, U.S. Secret Service-Retired; CEO Talon Companies, professional security and risk management: It amazes me when I read a letter from a professor of peace studies who correlates the atrocious acts that occurred in Nazi Germany with waterboarding of Islamic terrorists [“Bolton’s tortured logic,” Letters, April 19]. First, the waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah, a known terrorist, produced information that led to the apprehension of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the No. 3 most powerful member of al-Qaida, in Pakistan.

Mohammed, the architect of the attacks on 9/11, confessed after he was waterboarded to planning more than 300 terrorist plots that could have cost more than 100,000 lives. He confessed to planning the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, the aborted bombing of the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles, the Millennium Plot and the 2002 kidnapping and beheading of Daniel Pearl.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is alive and well after his waterboarding. Countless thousands are dead because of his evil plots. I have no sympathy for those who plan to kill the infidel and if waterboarding can be used to extract valuable information that saves American lives, so be it.

Will’s outrage over waterboarding is particularly hard to accept in light of this administration’s policy of “drone killings.” I do not oppose drone killings of known terrorists. However, it is ironic that a professor of peace studies would be so outraged over waterboarding to rail against former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton but can find no words of outrage against President Barack Obama for drone killings.

In the name of ‘safety’

COSTA MESA, Judith Berry: There are huge debates in Washington D.C. about gun control and amnesty, but the fire pits in Huntington Beach may matter more to most of us than what happens or doesn’t happen in D.C.

California, several decades ago, was to a place to go to be free and have fun. You could go to the beach with some firewood and fishing poles, take a six-pack and pack of cigarettes along with your snacks.

First they took away the fishing from the shore (not safe). Then they moved the bonfires to fire rings (safer). They banned alcohol (dangerous), then cigarettes (bad for you and the beach) and now they want to take away fires all together. They would probably ban marshmallows.

I have never lit a fire on the beach, but I love to see the fires and smell them when I drive Pacific Coast Highway. I love to see people get to the beach before 8:00 a.m. on holidays to secure one a ring for much later. They look so happy and excited.

Don’t let the Coastal Commission members take away one of the last affordable and fun things to do in California.

Join the Conversation

We invite you to use our commenting platform to engage in insightful conversations about issues in our community. Although we do not pre-screen comments, we reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable to us, and to disclose any information necessary to satisfy the law, regulation, or government request. We might permanently block any user who abuses these conditions.

If you see comments that you find offensive, please use the “Flag as Inappropriate” feature by hovering over the right side of the post, and pulling down on the arrow that appears. Or, contact our editors by emailing moderator@scng.com.